Katar’da Ekolojik Ayak İzi ve Alt Bileşenlerinin Durağanlığının Test Edilmesi: Kesirli Frekanslı Fourier Birim Kök Analizi

Year 2023, CIRCULAR ECONOMY AND SUSTAINABILITY, 205 - 218, 05.01.2023

Tunahan Hacıimamoğlu

https://doi.org/10.51551/verimlilik.1071540

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı 1980-2017 yılları arası Katar’da ekolojik ayak izi ve alt bileşenlerinin durağanlığını incelemektir.

Yöntem: Katar’da ekolojik ayak izi ve alt bileşenlerinin durağanlığı kesirli frekanslı Fourier ADF ve ADF birim kök testleri ile analiz edilmiştir.

Bulgular: Kesirli frekanslı Fourier ADF test bulgularına göre inşaat alanları ayak izi, karbon salımı ayak izi ve toplam ekolojik ayak izi değişkenlerinin durağan olduğu tespit edilmiştir. ADF test bulgularına göre tarım alanı ve otlak alan ayak izi değişkenlerinin durağan olduğu, balıkçılık alanları ve orman ürünleri ayak izi değişkenlerinin ise birim köklü olduğu belirlenmiştir.

Özgünlük: Ekolojik ayak izi ve alt bileşenlerinin durağanlığının araştırıldığı çalışmalarda elde edilen sonuçlar bu alanda bir uzlaşı olmadığını göstermektedir. Ayrıca literatürde Katar için doğrudan ekolojik ayak izinin durağanlığının incelendiği herhangi bir çalışmaya rastlanmamıştır. Katar için ekolojik ayak izi ve alt bileşenlerinin durağanlıklarının güncel analiz yöntemleri ile test edildiği ilk araştırma olarak bu çalışmanın literatüre katkı sunması beklenmektedir.

Keywords

Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma, Çevresel Kirlilik, Ekolojik Ayak İzi, Kesirli Frekanslı Fourier ADF Birim Kök Testi

Supporting Institution

Çalışma herhangi bir kurum tarafından desteklenmemektedir.

Testing the Stationarity of per Capita Ecological Footprint and Its Sub-Components: Fractional Frequency Fourier Unit Root Analysis

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study is to analyze the stationarity of the ecological footprint and its sub-components in Qatar between 1980 and 2017.

Methodology: The stationarity of ecological footprint and its sub-components in Qatar were analyzed by the fractional frequency Fourier ADF and ADF unit root tests.

Findings: According to the fractional frequency Fourier ADF test findings, it has been determined that the built-up land footprint, carbon emission footprint and total ecological footprint variables are stationary. According to the ADF test findings, however, it has been determined that the variables of cropland footprint and grazing land footprint are stationary, and the variables of fishing grounds footprint and forest land footprint are unit rooted.

Originality: The results obtained in studies investigating the stationarity of the ecological footprint and its sub-components indicate that there is no consensus in this field. Besides, no study has been found in the literature that directly investigates the stationarity of the ecological footprint for Qatar. As being the first study in which the stationarity of the ecological footprint and sub-components is tested with modern analysis methods for Qatar, it is expected that this study will contribute to the literature.

Keywords

Sustainable Development, Environmental Pollution, Ecological Footprint, Fractional Frequency Fourier ADF Unit Root Test

References

• Abulibdeh, A. (2022). “Time Series Analysis of Environmental Quality in the State of Qatar”, Energy Policy, 168, 113089, 1-18.
• Ahmed, M., Khan, A.M., Bibi, S. ve Zakaria, M. (2017). “Convergence of Per Capita CO2 Emissions Across the Globe: Insights via Wavelet Analysis”, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 75, 86-97.
• Aldy, J.E. (2006). “Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions: Convergence or Divergence?”, Environmental and Resource Economics, 33(4), 533-555.
• Alper, A.E. ve Alper, F.Ö. (2021). “Persistence of Policy Shocks to the Ecological Footprint of MINT Countries”, Ege Academic Review, 21(4), 427-440.
• Altan, A.D. ve Sağbaş, A. (2020). “Türkiye’nin Enerji Verimliliği ve İklim Değişikliği Performansı: Mevcut Durum ve Gelecek Projeksiyonu”, Verimlilik Dergisi, (1), 7-26.
• Becker, R., Enders, W. ve Lee, J. (2006). “A Stationarity Test in the Presence of an Unknown Number of Smooth Breaks”, Journal of Time Series Analysis, 27(3), 381-409.
• Bozoklu, S., Yılancı, V. ve Görüş, M.S. (2020). “Persistence in Per Capita Energy Consumption: A Fractional Integration Approach with a Fourier Function”, Energy Economics, 91, 104926, 1-12.
• Çağlar, A.E., Balsalobre-Lorente, D. ve Akin, C.S. (2021). “Analysing the Ecological Footprint in EU-5 Countries under a Scenario of Carbon Neutrality: Evidence from Newly Developed Sharp and Smooth Structural Breaks in Unit Root Testing”, Journal of Environmental Management, 295, 113155, 1-8.
• Camarero, M., Picazo-Tadeo, A.J. ve Tamarit, C. (2013). “Are the Determinants of CO2 Emissions Converging among OECD Countries?”, Economics Letters, 118(1), 159-162.
• Charfeddine, L. (2017). “The Impact of Energy Consumption and Economic Development on Ecological Footprint and CO2 Emissions: Evidence from a Markov Switching Equilibrium Correction Model”, Energy Economics, 65, 355-374.
• Christopoulos, D.K. ve Leon-Ledesma, M.A. (2011). “International Output Convergence, Breaks, and Asymmetric Adjustment”, Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics, 15(3), 1-35.
• Cole, M.A. (2004). “Trade, the Pollution Haven Hypothesis and the Environmental Kuznets Curve: Examining the Linkages”, Ecological Economics, 48(1), 71-81.
• Criado, C.O. ve Grether, J.M. (2011). “Convergence in Per Capita CO2 Emissions: A Robust Distributional Approach”, Resource and Energy Economics, 33(3), 637-665.
• Dickey, D.A. ve Fuller, W.A. (1979). “Distribution of the Estimators for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root”, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74(366a), 427-431.
• Dickey, D.A. ve Fuller, W.A. (1981). “Likelihood Ratio Statistics for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root”, Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 1057-1072.
• Enders, W. ve Lee, J. (2012). “The Flexible Fourier Form and Dickey–Fuller Type Unit Root Tests”, Economics Letters, 117(1), 196-199.
• Ewing, B., Moore, D., Goldfinger, S., Oursler, A., Reed, A. ve Wackernagel, M. (2010). “Ecological Footprint Atlas 2010”, Global Footprint Network, Oakland.
• Global Footprint Network (2021). “Advancing the Science of Sustainability”, https://data.footprintnetwork.org, (Erişim Tarihi:10.12.2021).
• Grossman, G.M. ve Krueger, A.B. (1991). “Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement”, NBER Working Paper, 1–39.
• Heil, M.T. ve Selden, T.M. (1999). “Panel Stationarity with Structural Breaks: Carbon Emissions and GDP”, Applied Economics Letters, 6(4), 223-225.
• Kihombo, S., Ahmed, Z., Chen, S., Adebayo, T.S. ve Kırıkkaleli, D. (2021). “Linking Financial Development, Economic Growth, and Ecological Footprint: What Is the Role of Technological Innovation?”, Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(43), 61235-61245.
• Lee, K.C. (2014). “Is Per Capita Real GDP Stationary in China? Sequential Panel Selection Method”, Economic Modelling, 37, 507-517.
• Lee, C.C. ve Chang, C.P. (2008). “Trend Stationary of Inflation Rates: Evidence from LM Unit Root Testing with a Long Span of Historical Data”, Applied Economics, 40(19), 2523-2536.
• Lee, C.C. ve Chang, C.P. (2009). “Stochastic Convergence of Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions and Multiple Structural Breaks in OECD countries”, Economic Modelling, 26(6), 1375-1381.
• Lee, J. ve Strazicich, M.C. (2003). “Minimum Lagrange Multiplier Unit Root Test with Two Structural Breaks”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(4), 1082-1089.
• Li, X.L., Tang, D.P. ve Chang, T. (2014). “CO2 Emissions Converge in the 50 US States—Sequential Panel Selection Method”, Economic Modelling, 40, 320-333.
• Lin, D., Hanscom, L., Martindill, J., Borucke, M., Cohen, L., Galli, A., Lazarus, E., Zokai, G., Iha, K. ve Wackernagel, M. (2016). “Working Guidebook to the National Footprint Accounts”, Global Footprint Network, Oakland.
• Magazzino, C. (2019). “Testing the Stationarity and Convergence of CO2 Emissions Series in MENA Countries”, International Journal of Energy Sector Management, 977-990.
• Mannan, M., Alhaj, M., Mabrouk, A.N. ve Al-Ghamdi, S.G. (2019). “Examining the Life-Cycle Environmental Impacts of Desalination: A Case Study in the State of Qatar”, Desalination, 452, 238-246.
• Narayan, P.K. ve Smyth, R. (2007). “Are Shocks to Energy Consumption Permanent or Temporary? Evidence from 182 Countries”, Energy Policy, 35(1), 333-341.
• Nelson, C.R. ve Plosser, C.R. (1982). “Trends and Random Walks in Macroeconomic Time Series: Some Evidence and Implications”, Journal of Monetary Economics, 10(2), 139-162.
• Omay, T. (2015). “Fractional Frequency Flexible Fourier Form to Approximate Smooth Breaks in Unit Root Testing”, Economics Letters, 134, 123-126.
• Özcan, B., Danish, K. ve Bozoklu, S. (2021). “Dynamics of Ecological Balance in OECD Countries: Sustainable or Unsustainable?”, Sustainable Production and Consumption, 26, 638–647.
• Özcan, B., Ulucak, R. ve Dogan, E. (2019). “Analyzing Long Lasting Effects of Environmental Policies: Evidence from Low, Middle and High Income Economies”, Sustainable Cities and Society, 44, 130-143.
• Payne, J.E. ve Apergis, N. (2021). “Convergence of Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions among Developing Countries: Evidence from Stochastic and Club Convergence Tests”, Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(26), 33751-33763.
• Perron, P. (1989). “Testing for a Random Walk: A Simulation Experiment of Power When the Sampling Interval Is Varied”, In Advances in Econometrics and Modelling, 47-68.
• Phillips, P.C. ve Sul, D. (2007). “Transition Modeling and Econometric Convergence Tests”, Econometrica, 75(6), 1771-1855.
• Rees, W.E. (1992). “Ecological Footprints and Appropriated Carrying Capacity: What Urban Economics Leaves Out”, Environment & Urbanization, 4(2), 121–130.
• Rodrigues, P.M. ve Robert Taylor, A.M. (2012). “The Flexible Fourier Form and Local Generalised Least Squares De‐Trended Unit Root Tests”, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 74(5), 736-759.
• Shafik, N. (1994). “Economic Development and Environmental Quality: An Econometric Analysis”, Oxford Economic Papers, 757–773.
• Solarin, S.A. (2019). “Convergence in CO2 Emissions, Carbon Footprint and Ecological Footprint: Evidence from OECD Countries”, Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(6), 6167–6181.
• Solarin, S.A. (2020). “Towards Sustainable Development: A Multi‐Country Persistence Analysis of Forest Products Footprint Using a Stationarity Test with Smooth Shifts”, Sustainable Development, 28(5), 1465-1476.
• Solarin, S.A. ve Bello, M.O. (2018). “Persistence of Policy Shocks to an Environmental Degradation Index: The Case of Ecological Footprint in 128 Developed and Developing Countries”, Ecological Indicators, 89, 35-44.
• Solarin, S.A., Gil-Alana, L.A. ve Lafuente, C. (2019). “Persistence in Carbon Footprint Emissions: An Overview of 92 Countries”, Carbon Management, 10(4), 405-415.
• Solarin, S.A., Gil-Alana, L.A. ve Lafuente, C. (2021). “Persistence and Sustainability of Fishing Grounds Footprint: Evidence from 89 Countries”, Science of the Total Environment, 751, 141594, 1-8.
• Stern, D.I. (2014). “The Environmental Kuznets Curve: A primer”, CCEP Working Paper 1404, 1-21.
• Tiwari, A.K., Nasir, M.A., Shahbaz, M. ve Raheem, I.D. (2021). “Convergence and Club Convergence of CO2 Emissions at State Levels: A Nonlinear Analysis of the USA”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 288, 125093, 1-12.
• Ulucak, R. ve Lin, D. (2017). “Persistence of Policy Shocks to Ecological Footprint of the USA”, Ecological Indicators, 80, 337-343.
• United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), (2019). “Global environment outlook 6”, Geneva. Ünlü, F. (2021). “Çevresel İnovasyonların Toplam Faktör Verimliliği Üzerindeki Etkisi: Panel ARDL Yaklaşımı”, Verimlilik Dergisi, (4), 21-34.
• Vincent, J.R. (1997). “Testing for Environmental Kuznets Curves within a Developing Country”, Environment and Development Economics, 2(4), 417–431.
• Wackernagel, M. ve Rees, W. (1996). “Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth”, New Society Publishers, 1-29.
• Wackernagel, M. ve Rees, W.E. (1997). “Perceptual and Structural Barriers to Investing in Natural Capital: Economics from an Ecological Footprint Perspective”, Ecological Economics, 20(1), 3-24.
• Yılancı, V., Görüş, M.S. ve Aydin, M. (2019). “Are Shocks to Ecological Footprint in OECD Countries Permanent or Temporary?”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 212, 270-301.
• Yılancı, V. ve Pata, U.K. (2020). “Convergence of Per Capita Ecological Footprint Among the ASEAN-5 Countries: Evidence from a Non-Linear Panel Unit Root Test”, Ecological Indicators, 113, 106178, 1-8.
• Yılancı, V., Pata, U.K. ve Cutcu, I. (2022). “Testing the Persistence of Shocks on Ecological Footprint and Sub-accounts: Evidence from the Big Ten Emerging Markets”, International Journal of Environmental Research, 16(1), 1-13.
• Zivot, E. ve Andrews, D.W.K. (1992). “Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis”, Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 10, 251-270.